Advocates push state to prepare for climate change

Thursday

In April of 2016, a King tide, one of the highest tides of the year, rose over the sea walls and wharfs of Atlantic Avenue in Boston, swamping the sidewalks, parking lots, and streets.

The scene was not just a demonstration of the power over the ocean of the combined gravitational pull of sun and moon when they are closest to the earth and perfectly aligned, but a glimpse into a future when sea rise will be measured in feet not inches.

Add a storm and the gentle flow of tides becomes the fury of wind and waves, something New York City experienced as a diminished, post-tropical storm Sandy came ashore on a full moon that made tides 20 percent higher than normal and allowed the storm surge to overwhelm the city’s defenses, causing massive flooding and damage to streets, subways and electrical systems.

The same thing could occur in Massachusetts, according to advocates pushing the state to prepare defenses for a future where the sea will be higher and the storms stronger. Cape Cod and the Islands, which represent about half of the state's coastline, are considered among the most vulnerable areas to those anticipated changes.

“Eighty-five percent of state residents, 6.7 million people, live within 50 miles of the coast. We would have a major impact from a 1,000 mile-wide storm like Sandy,” said Jack Clarke, the director of public policy and government relations for the Massachusetts Audubon Society. “Accelerated sea level rise, larger storms, increased heat. How, in Massachusetts, do we live with that?”

Clarke co-wrote legislation, sponsored by Senate president pro tempore Marc Pacheco, D-Taunton, that requires the state to assess vulnerable areas and populations; evaluate critical sectors like transportation, communication and energy; come up with ways to improve resiliency; establish a grant program to help cities, towns and regional planning agencies with assessments and planning; and fund a buyout of property in jeopardy while rebuilding natural coastal defenses like dunes and beaches. It does not just address sea rise and storms but also requires comprehensive analysis and planning for heat, droughts and protecting water supplies. A dozen municipal wastewater treatment plants, for instance, are located at sea level, Clarke said.

It also establishes an advisory commission drawn from a wide range of stakeholders to come up with an adaption plan.

The planning process would help with future development, like where septic systems and sewer pipes are placed, and requiring conservation restrictions on water use for droughts, said Association to Preserve Cape Cod Assistant Director Don Keeran.

“For the Cape, how much more coastal development are we going to sustain?” said Keeran, whose association was one of 51 environmental organizations, government agencies, engineering, architecture, and energy firms and associations that formed the Massachusetts Climate Change Adaption Coalition, which backed the legislation.

The bill essentially takes much of what was in Gov. Charlie Baker’s 2016 executive order on climate change, adds a $20 million buyout fund, and establishes climate change adaption as state policy, so that it can’t be easily repealed by a succeeding administration.

The real teeth in the bill, said Clarke, is a requirement that permitting, grants, borrowing and approvals by state agencies and authorities must, “to the maximum extent practicable,” be consistent with the advisory commission's climate adaptation plan.

That measure is also where the bill garnered its staunchest opposition, according to Tamara Small, the senior vice president of government affairs at the National Association of Industrial and Office Properties in Massachusetts, which represents large developers and commercial real estate companies.

The language in the section Clarke referenced was vague and will lead to uncertainty in the industry.

“Who determines what is the maximum extent practicable?” said Small, adding that her organization supported Baker's executive order but questioned whether the language opened a new avenue for advocacy groups to challenge development.

The same language has been used by the state Legislature, the U.S. Congress, in the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, plus in 13 other states, Clarke said.

“The language is vetted and also tested in state and federal courts,” he said.

Along with the $20 million buyout fund, the price tag of more than $230 million for various components of the legislation includes: $120 million for coastal infrastructure like seawalls and other structures; $49 million for dam removal and repair; and $20 million for a new climate center at the University of Massachusetts.

The adaptation coalition suggested most of the money would come from the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, a cap-and-trade program, which requires power companies to pay when their emissions exceed an allotted amount. The state anticipates an additional $350 million in revenues from that program by 2020 and the coalition proposed diverting 20 percent of that to the adaptation plan. Alternative payments from power utilities that don’t meet the state standard for the amount of renewable energy is another source for funding the work.

The bill unanimously passed in the state Senate on a roll-call vote in early November and is now in the House Ways and Means committee. This is the fifth time the Senate has passed a version of this bill, going back to July of 2014, only to have it die in the House committee without reaching the floor for a vote.

“We face a whole set of risks if we are not serious about climate adaptation,” said state Sen. Julian Cyr, D-Truro.

The new bill addressed concerns raised about prior versions and is “common sense legislation,” Cyr said.

“I am hopeful we can get this thing to move,” said state Rep. Sarah Peake, D-Provincetown, citing the state's role as a national leader in renewable energy and its commitment to the Paris climate accord despite moves at the federal level to withdraw from such efforts.

“I see this bill as being in the same vein, and realize the importance of it,” Peake said.

As a representative of a coastal district that bears the brunt of erosion and sea level rise, she doesn’t need convincing, she said.

“We need to convince our inland colleagues this is a good idea,” Peake said.

— Follow Doug Fraser on Twitter: @dougfrasercct.

Never miss a story

Choose the plan that's right for you.
Digital access or digital and print delivery.